The republicans did tell outrageous lies about Kerry. If this disturbs you, don’t vote republican. But don’t claim that y’all have been honest, either. (maybe you personaly didn’t lie, but Rove and his buddies sure did)
Many people who were uninformed/unintelligent did vote for Bush. This is simply a fact. Again, sorry if it disturbs you, but it’s the truth.
There was a massive appeal to fear used by the Bush campaign, and many voters this go around were uninformed. Again, this is truth. Sorry if you don’t like it.
Bush has lied, and has given illegal no-bid contracts to halliburton, etc… so, again, corruption is a fact. If you don’t like it, don’t vote republican.
Rove and the republicans are better at distortions, lies, fearmongering, manipulation. Again, this is a fact. If you don’t like it, don’t vote republican.
Bush’s lies and cherrypicking of intelligence did (and will continue) to lead to the deaths and maimings of hundreds of American citizens. This is a fact. If you don’t like it, don’t vote republican.
And nobody said the republicans are pedophiles, simply that if they were, someone would find a way to rationlize it. (much like you’ve done in your post with other facets of the administration)
Blah blah blah. Saying it’s fact, doesn’t make it true, and neither does bolding it. If you print it in 36pt font, it still won’t be true.
You can lie to yourself, and you can lie amongst yourselves. You can all sit in a circle and wail “we lost because we were more honest”, “we lost because we were smarter”, “we lost because we treated the people with respect, and the oppostion treated them like buffoons”.
Yeah, right.
Meanwhile, the other side is in power, and holds more power than they did last election.
Yes, Bill, we know that. That’s what we’re pissed about. We covered this. We also know that you know he lied when he said he was certain. What we can’t understand is you shrugging it off.
Oh, so you want cites?
Fair deal.
After you read this, I expect you to concede that we are right.
Otherwise, you go in the column of “ignorant and uninformed.” (sorry, that too is a fact.)
Naw, you’ve got that covered. I’ll stick to facts, thank you kindly.
No… we were lost becuase the republican machine beat us.
Because people like you swallowed the lies.
The cites are right above you, do you have courage, honor, and integrity?
Or are you going to hold to the party line?
And was elected by a, largely, clueless population.
You must be so proud.
I hate willful ignorance.
Either have some courage and say “Yes, the president is a liar, and I’m just fine with that.” Or continue to shove you head somewhere dark and warm and sing “lalalalala, I can’t heaaaaaaaaar you.”
OK. So did the Democrats. Citefor the ad Kerry ran saying Bush had a secret plan to privatize Social Security after the election and cut benefits 30-45%, knowing all along Bush had pledged not to cut benefits and had made no secret of his intent to move towards privatization.
So if Kerry had won, I assume you’d be here, outraged, that the Democrats won by telling LIES.
Actually, I don’t assume that, because you wouldn’t, you hypocrite.
Yes. True. And so were many people that voted for Kerry.
And so did Kerry - claiming that Bush would cut Social Security is an appeal to fear, and anyone who believed that was uninformed. Many did. Kerry said that Bush had created tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas. Cite. But Bush didn’t – the tax code provision had been there for decades. This is clearly an appeal to fear – the fear of losing your job to an overseas source.
Cite for this claim?
I just showed that Kerry used the same tactics. So if I concede that Rove and the Republicans are better… then your complaint seems to be that we are better at using these terrible tactics than you are.
Waaaahh!
I contend that although Bush was mistaken on the presence of WMD, the actions we took in Iraq were sound, even though they cost lives. Listen: Roosevelt’s decision to get us involved in WWII cost over a hundred thousand dead Americans. But it was the right decision, even though it lead to deaths.
Since this is the pit…
Fuck you asshole.
I’m not a democrat, and I hold truth as one of my highest virtues.
Fuck you.
Not nearly as large a percentage.
Nor do I see how pointing out that the other guy’s support was fucked changes the fact that yours was.
Your point?
Or are we back at recess in second grade?
“But but but… he did it first!”
I don’t care who lied. It is wrong, it is immoral, and it should be fought.
Pointing out how the other side lied is beneath you and doesn’t prove a goddamn thing about your side.
Check the FBI investigation or the cite I already gave.
I’m not a democrat.
Wanna blow some more smoke?
Do you want to have any honor at all?
Will you, right here, right now, say in bold text:
“I am embarrased and ashamed that my party used such dishonest and underhanded tactics?”
If not, I will have to question your moral foundation as you seem to be conent with saying “well, the other guys did it too!”
non sequitor
I am not arguing about the overall validity of the invasion.
Simply the fact that it was based on lies.
Don’t give me this mistaken bullshit.
The intel was not clear, and he said it was.
That is a lie.
Indeed. Well, Kerry’s lies in his ads stretch back months. PLease point me to ONE post of yours before today that condemns those lies, and I will apologize for having misjudged you and abjectly ask for your forgiveness.
How do you know what the percentage was? That study focused on Bush voters’ perceptions. Where was the study that asked people if Kerry favored gay marriage, if he wanted “Under God” in the pledge or not, and if he planned to cut or raise taxes, and on whom? Without that, you cannot possibly claim that Bush supporters were more ignorant of their candidate’s positions.
Unfortunately, political ads that sought to be absolutely neutral and convey the good, the bad, and the ugly about their preferred candidate might be nice, but they are not going to happen. I’m not proud of how my side distorted Kerry’s voting record. But I understand the necessity to counter Kerry’s distortion of my side’s Social Security plans. And I’m sure someone over on the Kerry side is saying, “Well, we had to lie about Bush’s Social Security plans, to counter their lies about US!”
Find me a presidential campaign that consisted of nothing but truthful, unvarnished commentary about the issues. When has it happened?
No - I’m not proud of it. But it’s the reality of how these things work. Too tought for you? Move to Pitcairn Island.
Again: I am embarrased and ashamed that my party used such dishonest and underhanded tactics. But I recognize it as a regrettable necessity because the OTHER party uses dishonest and underhanded tactics, too. And unilatera disarmament here seems like a really naive idea.
No, it was an error. The UK had the same intel we did; they reached the same conclusion. You may say that Bush intimidated the CIA analysts – did he intimidate the guys at MI6, too?
Cost lives? Try costing lives. Unless were done over there and someone forgot to me.
How the hell do we know it’s the right decision? Because a big ass war we were dragged into decades ago turned out ok? Iraq ain’t over yet, so save your celebrations. By the way, it ain’t going to well.
I don’t understand your point at all. I was rebutting the argument that because it cost lives, the decision was bad, by pointing out that not every decision that costs lives is bad.
Now you’re asking how we know it’s the right decision. The removal of a murderous dictator from power seems like an obvious good. The establishment of a democracy in the Middle East other than Israel seems like an obvious good. That’s how we know it’s a good decision.
Sure. Roosevelt could have asked Congress only to declare war on Japan, and signalled Hitler his intention to remain out of Europe. He could have surrendered immeidately. That would have avoided the loss of American soldiers.
It would have been a bad idea, though.
Except, perhaps, to the “violence never solves anything” and “war is always bad” crowd.
Yes, they did turn out to be right. But that doesn’t make Bush a liar, does it? It makes him wrong – mistaken. If no one else was convinced by the evidence, then sure – you’ve got a good case to say that Bush lied. But if Bush AND OTHERS were convinced, then it becomes obvious that reasonable people could make the same assumption he did.
Actually I think I bungled what I was saying, forget that part. Keep in mind that not every decision that costs lives is good either.
Has that democracy been established yet? As far as removing Saddam, it may have been a good move, or it may have cleared room for someone even worse. You may want to hold off on the rosy scenarios, because right now things ain’t looking to good.
He either lied or was mistaken, to be honest I could care less which. The consequences and the shithole we’re in because of his incompetence are very real.
I never understand that point of view.
Them: “He didn’t lie, he was mistaken!”
Me: “alright so he’s a fucking moron, not an asshole, what’s your point?”